Passenger Trains > Obama signs bill: Gun carrying Amtrak passengers must b

President Signs Bill That Allows Gun-Slinging AMTRAK Passengers to be
Locked in Boxes

Harry Houdini made a career escaping from locked boxes. So
did David Copperfield and Doug Henning. And now you can add
AMTRAK passengers packing heat in their luggage to that list
of escape artists.

It sounds absurd. But President Obama actually signed a
bill into law Wednesday that requires passengers who carry
firearms aboard AMTRAK be locked in boxes for their
journey.

http://congress.blogs.foxnews.com/2009/12/16/president-signs-bill-that-allows-gun-slinging-amtrak-passengers-to-be-locked-in-boxes/

=================================================

Hey, as long as Obama doesn't read what he signs, how about
somebody send him a check for several million dollars, made out to me,
for him to sign?

Oh, he'd just print up more money to cover it, so it'd be no big deal.

Except that a few million dollars wouldn't be worth that much any more.
Better make it a lot of million dollars.

-GP

"Locking passengers in boxes."

OK. Tell me again the problem with this new law??

You know, I wonder if there is a law that says you can't carry a gun on Amtrak? Maybe this is the only law governing weapons on passenger trains and it is a new restriction, rather than a relaxing of gun laws.

I actually like the way the bill is worded. Please, don't change a thing! LOL.

There is language in the bill that requires gun-carrying passengers (rather than the guns themselves) to be locked in boxes. It will have to be corrected in a "technical amendment".

The purpose of the law is to put Amtrak on the same footing with buses and airplanes (and for that matter, automobiles), where you can carry unloaded firearms in your checked baggage (and their ammunition, too, in a separate and appropriate container). It's got nothing directly to do with gun control, which the Supreme Court has invalidated anyway. You still can't own machine guns or hand grenades, however.

Its is an error in the law and I hope that it does get fixed. The intent of the law is great though. Airlines have always been permitted to have weapons on the plane but since 9/11 Amtrak will only allow law enforcement to carry weapons on-board. This law is not talking about the weapons being carried in revenue space, its talking about checking them in the baggage car. Amtrak can benefit out of this as they travel through some great hunting territory and now hunters from across the country can take Amtrak to the big hunt.

rresor Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
.................... You still can't own
> machine guns or hand grenades, however.

Actually we can still own machine guns. Once you find the machine gun, you apply to the FBI for the licence. If you pass the background check, you pay a $200.00 transfer tax and buy the gun. This assumes that you live in a state that allows private ownership of full auto weapons. I have read that since the law was put into effect in 1934, there haven't been any crimes committed with licenced automatic weapons. Given the price on these things, I'll bet that most of the licence holders are well to do collectors.
Do the passenger carrying boxes ride in the baggage car? :-)

Len

Yea, count out CA for that, gotta go to great states where there are still people with a brain in their heads that think with common sense.

I digress, yea and if you can afford ammo for them.

You can have what was once a machine gun, even in CA, but it's stuck to semi-auto, I have a Browning 1919A6 ;-)

I took a couple of my pistols with me to MT in Oct, easier than I thought, I was waiting to be hassled by TSA, not a problem at all.

So this is good that it's being allowed, anyone gun owner who has common sense anyway would pack it in an locked container in their luggage anyways.

CRRNJ Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

> Actually we can still own machine guns. Once you
> find the machine gun, you apply to the FBI for the
> licence. If you pass the background check, you pay
> a $200.00 transfer tax and buy the gun. This
> assumes that you live in a state that allows
> private ownership of full auto weapons. I have
> read that since the law was put into effect in
> 1934, there haven't been any crimes committed with
> licenced automatic weapons. Given the price on
> these things, I'll bet that most of the licence
> holders are well to do collectors.
> Do the passenger carrying boxes ride in the
> baggage car? :-)
>
> Len

Maybe this is something Amtrak needs to consider in its new equipment order. <G>

If you can stack gun owners in their boxes at the rear of a coach, you don't need seats for them. If this works, I'm sure the airlines and the TSA will jump on the bandwagon, and require airline passengers be boxed or crated before shipping...

It would probably be more comfortable that being crammed into the seats in the cabin ;-)

Lackawanna484 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Maybe this is something Amtrak needs to consider
> in its new equipment order.
>
> If you can stack gun owners in their boxes at the
> rear of a coach, you don't need seats for them.
> If this works, I'm sure the airlines and the TSA
> will jump on the bandwagon, and require airline
> passengers be boxed or crated before shipping...

GenePoon Wrote:
>
>
>
> =================================================
>
> Hey, as long as Obama doesn't read what he signs,
> how about
> somebody send him a check for several million
> dollars, made out to me,
> for him to sign?
>
> Oh, he'd just print up more money to cover it, so
> it'd be no big deal.
>
> Except that a few million dollars wouldn't be
> worth that much any more.
> Better make it a lot of million dollars.
>
> -GP

Hey Gene,

I know that your occaisionally-exhibited sense of humor runs toward the wry side, but the above was one of the funniest comments I have ever read on Trainorders. I've been laughing for 10 minutes.

Thanks,

-John

I think they should allow smoking in the box, and also since it is a private passenger space, personal stocks of alcohol should be allowed as well. Clearly a premium space worthy of increased fare!

Watch this move be the stupidest move they ever made! Just watch!

jkchubbes Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Its is an error in the law and I hope that it does
> get fixed. The intent of the law is great though.
> Airlines have always been permitted to have
> weapons on the plane but since 9/11 Amtrak will
> only allow law enforcement to carry weapons
> on-board. This law is not talking about the
> weapons being carried in revenue space, its
> talking about checking them in the baggage car.
> Amtrak can benefit out of this as they travel
> through some great hunting territory and now
> hunters from across the country can take Amtrak to
> the big hunt.

Yes, but Amtrak's objection to the bill was their possible liability if a gun should be stolen while in checked baggage, which I think is a valid concern. Airline baggage is kept in a much more secure environment because of the obvious security concerns specific to aviation. Amtrak hasn't had either the need or the funds to create this level of security around their baggage handling, particularly at smaller stations. I hope an unintended consequence of this legislation isn't further reduction in the number of stations and trains offering checked baggage service.

Dave

rresor Wrote:
---------------------------------------------------------------------

> It's got nothing directly
> to do with gun control, which the Supreme Court
> has invalidated anyway.

When did the Supreme Court "invalidate" gun control? In the June 2008 ruling of the District of Columbia vs. Heller, Supreme Court struck down two provisions of a Washington, DC gun control law. In doing so, the Court said that the Second Amendment is an individual right. However, the Court did not invalidate all local, state and federal gun control measures.

http://www.scotusblog.com/wp/court-a-constitutional-right-to-a-gun/



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 12/17/09 15:31 by RuleG.

fjc Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Yea, count out CA for that, gotta go to great
> states where there are still people with a brain
> in their heads that think with common sense.
>
With respect to state support for passenger trains, what state (other than New York) has done more to fund intercity passenger rail service than California?

RuleG Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> fjc Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Yea, count out CA for that, gotta go to great
> > states where there are still people with a
> brain
> > in their heads that think with common sense.
> >
> With respect to state support for passenger
> trains, what state (other than New York) has done
> more to fund intercity passenger rail service than
> California?

North Carolina, Illinois, and Washington state would be worthy contenders. Esp if you deduct the wasted funds on the TurboTrain rebuilding boondoggle.

This just made Fox News tonight.

Yea for the 2nd amendment and the constitution!!! I've taken firearms on airline flights before and it should not be a big deal,there locked in cases and in the cargo hold.Same thing for train rides,they will be locked up and in the baggage car.

stampedepass Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Yea for the 2nd amendment and the constitution!!!
> I've taken firearms on airline flights before and
> it should not be a big deal,there locked in cases
> and in the cargo hold.Same thing for train
> rides,they will be locked up and in the baggage
> car.


There's a neighborhood adjacent to the NEC in New London CT which the state condemned to hand over to Pfizer for a proposed new laboratory. Hundreds of home owners were evicted, and their homes destroyed.

Pfizer decided they didn't want to build in new London, after all. So much for illegal taking of property by the state. The Kelo property is a vacant field.

Forget the constitution, it's what the state decides.